MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Public Works & Transportation Committee held on Wednesday, January 17^th, 2007, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

2.

Wednesday, March 21^st, 2007 (tentative date) at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room.

It was moved and seconded

That the order of the Agenda be varied to deal with Item No. 8 – Richmond Family Place Facility Upgrades, immediately following the conclusion of the presentation by the final delegation.

CARRIED

DELEGATIONS

3.

(1)

Ms. De Whalen, representing the Blundell Interchange Group (BIG), regarding the proposed Blundell Road / Highway 99 Interchange.  (Agenda Item No. 6)  (File No.:  10-6350-07-07)

(Mayor Brodie entered the meeting at 4:04 p.m.)

De Whalen, 13631 Blundell Road, accompanied by Paul Edwards, 13291 Blundell Road, advised that the Blundell Interchange Group (BIG) had been formed as a result of concerns of the neighbourhood about the proposal that a Blundell Interchange be constructed at Highway 99 and Blundell Road.

Ms. Whalen then gave a PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is attached as Schedule A and forms part of these minutes, which addressed the concerns of BIG, with regard to:

·            

Safety – three issues:  possible interference of container truck traffic with the traffic from the local temples, mosques, churches and schools; farm vehicles; HOV lanes and the merging of Blundell Road traffic onto Highway 99 while freeway traffic was changing lanes to exit the freeway, all within a one kilometre area

·            

the impact of the proposed interchange on the south-east sector of Richmond

·            

agriculture – and whether the City would consider adding a criterion to the “Agriculture Impact Assessment” undertaken on all projects which could have an impact on agriculture:  ‘liveability for existing residents’

·            

environment

·            

the Fraser Port Authority

·            

viable alternatives:  such as using Nelson Road and/or No. 8 Road; allowing the Fraser Port Authority adequate access to the river via barges and/or a South Arm river road

At the conclusion of the presentation, discussion took place among Committee members, the delegation and staff on the proposal to consider the implementation of a partial interchange at Highway 99 and Nelson Road.  Reference was made to a question asked by Ms. Whelan about the criteria which comprised the Agriculture Impact Assessment initiative, and in response, advice was given that “liveability for existing residents” was always considered and would be part of the evaluation process.

Questions were asked about the potential for future growth at the Fraser Port Authority, and in answer, advice was given that the Fraser Port was continuing to attract new tenants to the area; that their growth rate had been strong and steady for the past few years, and would continue to grow until capacity was reached.  Further advice was given that a deep sea terminal was being considered which would result in increased traffic on Nelson Road and the south arm of the Fraser River.  As well, information was provided that a target timeline had not yet been established as the project was dependent on attracting tenants, and the impending merger could have an impact on how fast the growth of the Fraser Port occurred.

During the discussion, Ms. Whelan commended staff for the preparation of their report, and expressed agreement with the proposed recommendations.  She asked that BIG be included in future discussions on the proposed Highway 91/Nelson Road interchange.

Discussion continued, with comments being made by the delegation that in allowing cargo into the Blundell Road/Nelson Road area, the needs of the surrounding area must be considered because the truck route would cut right through the middle of this area.  Comments were made in response that the City did not have any plans to introduce a designated truck route for the City because it was felt that there was no need for such a route.  Advice was given that City staff were focusing on developing a reasonable access arrangement for the Fraser Port area; that residents’ concerns would be recognized during this process, and that a mutually acceptable solution would have to be found which would not put too much demand onto adjacent farmland.

During the discussion, the delegation was thanked for their interesting presentation, and for recognizing the need that action had to be taken and offering possible viable alternatives.

In response to questions about the involvement of BIG in the consultation process, advice was given that the organization would be included in future discussions.

Comments were made about future discussions, on-going plans, and the importance of having an overall plan for the area, during which reference was made to the future review of the City’s Official Community Plan (OCP), and a question was asked about whether that would be the time to commence with the project.  Advice was given in response that by the time the new OCP was adopted, City staff would know what support could be expected from the Minister of Transportation on undertaking an overall review of Highway 99 and the George Massey Tunnel.

In response to further questions about delaying the improvements to the Steveston Highway interchange, advice was given that this delay would allow the Ministry to determine what action to take regarding the George Massey Tunnel and Highway 99.  With respect to the development of a partial Nelson Road interchange with Highway 99, advice was given that the result would be a reduced volume of truck traffic in the Blundell Road/Sidaway Road area.

In concluding the discussion, the Chair thanked the delegation for their work in preparing possible alternative solutions to implementing the Blundell Road/Highway 99 interchange.  The delegation then left the meeting.

(2)

Diane Cousar, Chair, Gateway Theatre Society Board, and Suzanne Haines, General Manager, regarding the Gateway Theatre’s Use Of 6560 Gilbert Road (Current Family Place Facility).  (Agenda Item No. 8)  (File No.:  06-2280-01; xr: 06-2050-20-FP)

Diane Cousar, accompanied by Suzanne Haines, stated that the Richmond Family Place facility represented not only a good location because of its proximity to the Gateway Theatre, but also a good use of space, rather than demolishing the building and putting the area into parkland.

Ms. Haines then reviewed the Theatre report and talked about potential uses for the building, including office space which was not available in the main Theatre building, and the storage of costumes.  She added that the costumes, which were often rented by outside organizations, were currently located in boxes in an inaccessible warehouse, which made it difficult for potential renters to view.  Ms. Haines noted that the rental of costumes would be a potential source of revenue for the Theatre.  She also spoke about possible funding sources which might be available to the Theatre.

Ms. Haines then reviewed the recommendations, which was that the City create a partnership with the Gateway Theatre Society to upgrade the building at 6560 Gilbert Road, and to share operating costs.  She noted that the cost to upgrade the building for use by the Gateway Theatre would be $57,200, 33% of which the Theatre would attempt to cover, and that the operating cost of the building would be $6,100 a portion of which the Theatre might be able to cover in addition to janitorial services.

Discussion then took place among Committee members, staff and the delegation on the Theatre proposal, during which the following information and comments were made by Committee members, the delegation and staff:

·            

with respect to the minimum amount of renovation which would be required by the Theatre and whether the Theatre could manage the costs, advice was given that it was the understanding of the Theatre that a wall had to be replaced and repairs made to the roof

·            

with respect to the minimum amount of funding which could be contributed by the Theatre, advice was given that a number of required upgrades recommended by City staff would not be required by the Theatre, and that some funds would be available to undertake a number of the repairs;  further advice was given that Theatre staff had not had the opportunity to undertake detailed inspection of the building

·            

with respect to repairs to the building, advice was given that the furnace did not have to be replaced at the present time and could remain in operation until it failed, even though this was something which staff would not recommend; staff were recommending the required upgrades because these items were all past their life expectancies; staff could review the list of required upgrades with the Theatre to determine what could be eliminated

·            

reference was made to a proposal put forward ten years ago by the Gateway Theatre to the City that Richmond Family Place building be demolished because of the critical need for space by the Theatre even then

·            

a study should be undertaken to determine the additional space requirements for the Gateway Theatre for storage, office space, etc.; in response to questions about the cost of undertaking a 2,100 sq. ft. addition to the Gateway Theatre facility, advice was given that the cost would be between $600,000 and $1 Million

·            

with respect to the feasibility of launching a capital campaign to provide funds for an addition to the Theatre building, information was provided that the theatre building had reached its capacity and that either a new facility was needed, or alternatively, undertake a major renovation to the existing building; initial steps had been initiated to develop the documentation required to (i) examine what a new facility would look like, and (ii) determine the needs of the community; further advice was given that a capital campaign would be initiated but additional space was needed now to provide suitable storage for costumes

·            

the Richmond Family Place building would be well utilized and could save the Theatre on expenses as in some cases, theatre props had been destroyed because of the lack of adequate storage space

·            

the comprehensive development of Minoru Park and the Gateway Theatre should be considered in making a decision even if a temporary solution was undertaken; the plan for the park and having an improved vista for the Chapel was all part of the vision for Minoru Park and must also be considered

·            

the potential revenue which could be accrued from the rental of costumes was generally $1,000 to $2,000 per rental

·            

with reference to the possible use of the Gateway Theatre Endowment Fund, advice was given that the Board of Directors was responsible for this fund and it would their decision on how it could be used.

Concern was expressed during the discussion about the possibility that the repairs to the Family Place Building could result in the building being used for another 25 years.  Several Committee members stressed the fact that any repairs must be considered to be a ‘band-aid’ solution at best, and that the building would be in use for no longer than 18 months.  A brief discussion then ensued on the life expectancy of the roof of Richmond Family Place building.

During the discussion, the delegation expressed support for making repairs to the Richmond Family Place building, and for the potential use of the building for another 18 months.  However, concern was voiced that the process to undertake a complete visioning exercise and either construct a new facility or add to the existing theatre building, would take longer than the 18 month period being proposed.

Reference was made to the study being undertaken by the Gateway Theatre, and information was provided that the goal of the study was to determine the needs of the arts community, as well as the space requirements for the Theatre.  Further information was provided that because the Gateway Theatre was at capacity, the Theatre was considering expansion to the existing facility at its present location, or alternatively, a new building at another location. 

(Councillors McNulty and Sue Halsey-Brandt left the meeting at 5:05 p.m., during the above discussion, and did not return.)

Discussion continued briefly, with information being provided by the delegation in response to a question about whether the Theatre would be able finance operating costs for the Richmond Family Place building, that the Theatre could cover the janitorial costs, however, discussions would have to be held with the Board of the Gateway Theatre Society regarding the other maintenance costs. 

The delegation was thanked for their presentation, and they then left the meeting.

(3)

Rob Schillings, Coast Mountain Bus Company management representative and Gord Fletcher, representing CAW111, the union representing transit operators at Richmond Centre, to request the installation of an HOV/buses only lane from the north end of the Dinsmore Bridge along Russ Baker Way, northbound to Cessna Drive.  (Agenda Item No. 7)  (File No.:  10-6350-01)

Gord Fletcher, accompanied by Rob Schillings and Brenda Raincock, talked about the frustration faced by transit operators and passengers due to the delays being experienced during morning rush hour traffic along Russ Baker Way.  He referred to the colour photographs which had been included as part of his presentation to explain how the extension of the HOV lane could be accommodated.

Mr. Fletcher stated that the improvements would most likely reduce the amount of time (½ hour to 35 minutes) taken to travel the stretch of road from Cessna Drive to Russ Baker Way.  He added that the extension of the HOV lane would provide easy access to the new Kwantlen College and BCIT campuses. 

Ms. Raincock voiced her support for the proposal, stating that traffic congestion and on-time service was a big issue with TransLink.

Mr. Schillings also added his support to the proposal put forward by Mr. Fletcher, stating that the extension of the HOV lane would be advantageous to Richmond residents.

A brief discussion ensued among Committee members and Mr. Fletcher regarding the provision of access to the BCIT campus. 

The Chair thanked the delegation for their presentation, and they then left the meeting.

ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

8.

RICHMOND FAMILY PLACE FACILITY UPGRADES

(Report:  Jan. 19/07, File No.:  06-2050-20-FP/Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2055315)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the report (dated January 19^th, 2007, from the Director, Engineering), regarding Richmond Family Place – Facility Upgrades, be received for information.

(2)

That the matter be referred to staff to work with the Gateway Theatre to:

(a)

determine the cost to provide for a short term solution, to be no longer than two years, with regard to the use of the current Richmond Family Place facility by the Gateway Theatre; and

(b)

undertake a building analysis to consider the long term space requirements for the Gateway Theatre.

The question on the motion was not called, as it was stressed that the Gateway Theatre should not be permitted to use the Richmond Family Place building for a longer period of time than approximately eighteen months.  The comment was made that if the roof was not leaking at the present time, then repairs should be not initiated until such time as the roof was actually leaking.  However, the comment was made that the possibility of taking no action to repair the building would be dependent on health and safety restrictions.

A further comment was made that Gateway Theatre staff needed to consider future space requirements and that the location of the Theatre should also be reviewed.  Reference was made to the ongoing review of the City Centre Area Plan and the development of the new Parks & Recreation Master Plan, and the comment was made that the location of the Gateway Theatre should be considered as part of both reviews, especially if it was felt that the Theatre should be located within the City Centre.

Information was provided during the discussion that the cost to construct a 2,100 sq. ft. addition to the existing theatre facility would be approximately $600,000 to $800,000 in cost, and not $1 Million which had been indicated during the earlier presentation by the Gateway Theatre delegation.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

POLICIES / STRATEGIES (1 ITEM)

ENGINEERING &PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

4.

DRINKING WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

(Report:  Feb. 2/07, File No.:  10-6060-02-01/2007-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2075754)

It was moved and seconded

That:

(1)

The Greater Vancouver Water District's (GVWD) Drinking Water Management Plan for the GVRD and Member Municipalities be received for information; and

(2)

The regional Drinking Water Management Plan (as detailed in the report dated February 2^nd, 2007, from the Director, Engineering), be adopted.

The question on the motion was not called, as reference was made to the water audits to be undertaken of large water users.  A question was raised about whether any farms comprised the large water users.  Concern was expressed about the potential to impact the financial viability of the agriculture in the area.  In response, advice was given that there were no farms included at this time.

Reference was made to the requirement that low flush toilets must now be included in all new construction, and to the need to educate the public about these water efficient fixtures.  Information was provided in response that educational material was available on how to reduce water intake.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

***********************************

DECISIONS / ACTIONS (3 ITEMS)

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

5.

TRAFFIC SAFETY AWARENESS WEEK – MARCH 5-9, 2007

(Report:  Feb. 2/07, File No.:  10-6450-09-01/2007-Vol 01; xr: 7400-01) (REDMS No. 2067374)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the following recommendations be endorsed:

(a)

the 2007 Traffic Safety Awareness Week (March 5-9, 2007) activities initiated by the Richmond District Parents Association, sponsored by ICBC, the Autoplan Broker Road Safety Program and the Richmond School Board with the participation of the Way to Go! School Program, CARS BC and Better Environmentally Sound Transportation, (as outlined in the report dated February 2, 2007, from the Director, Transportation); and

(b)

staff involvement in the 2007 Traffic Safety Awareness Week activities as part of the City’s on-going traffic safety education strategy.

(2)

That the report be referred to the Council/School Board Liaison Committee for information.

CARRIED

6.

BLUNDELL ROAD AND STEVESTON HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES – FINDINGS OF STUDY

(Report:  Jan. 23/07, File No.:  10-6350-07-07/2007-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2071809)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the further planning and design of the Blundell Road Interchange and Steveston Highway Interchange improvements be deferred and incorporated into a future comprehensive improvement strategy for the Highway 99 Corridor, including the George Massey Tunnel.

(2)

That, until the Highway 99 corridor improvement strategy is developed, staff work with the Ministry of Transportation, TransLink, and the Fraser River Port Authority to examine implementing a partial interchange at Highway 91 and Nelson Road as an interim solution to enhance goods movements and road access to the Richmond southeast industrial area.

(3)

That a letter be sent from the City to the provincial Minister of Transportation and the Chief Executive Officer of the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority to commend the efforts of their staff in working with the City to complete the study, and to request their continued partnership in:

(a)

examining the interim term implementation of the partial Nelson Road Interchange at Highway 91 within the next five years; and

(b)

developing a longer term improvement strategy for the Highway 99 corridor through Richmond including the George Massey Tunnel and a new Blundell Road interchange.

The question on the motion was not called, as a brief discussion ensued on the feasibility of constructing a small bridge on Nelson Road, leading to the new Highway 91 interchange, which would allow farm equipment to travel underneath the roadway.  Advice was given in answer, that that proposal could be investigated.

In response to further questions about property ownership in the area of Nelson Road and Highway 91, advice was given that staff had not investigated ownership of the property in the area.  Discussion also took place briefly on whether the interim solution could result in being ‘the’ solution to address the truck traffic problems being experienced in the Blundell Road/Nelson Road area.  The Director, Transportation, Victor Wei, stated that the proposal would be an effective interim solution, and would be dependent on the extent of the Fraser Port growth.  However he added that based on long term plans for the Port, this interim strategy would not satisfy the ultimate needs for the area, and therefore, he would still recommend that the Blundell Interchange be considered as part of the comprehensive corridor investigation.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

7.

RUSS BAKER WAY-ARTHUR LAING BRIDGE CORRIDOR – TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES

(Report:  Feb. 7/07, File No.:  10-6350-01/2007-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2062816)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the following four traffic management initiatives for the Russ Baker Way-Arthur Laing Bridge corridor be assessed further by staff in working with Vancouver International Airport Authority, TransLink, and the City of Vancouver:

(a)

Stationing of a tow truck (point duty) at the south end of the Arthur Laing Bridge during the weekday morning peak period;

(b)

Installation of a video traffic monitoring camera in the vicinity of the Russ Baker Way/Cessna Drive intersection;

(c)

Southern extension of the northbound high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane on Russ Baker Way to the north end of No. 2 Road Bridge; and

(d)

Submission of Russ Baker Way for the inclusion in TransLink’s Major Road Network.

(2)

That staff report on the outcome of the above assessment and if applicable, an implementation strategy of the proposed traffic management initiatives for Council’s approval.

The question on the motion was not called, as Mr. Wei advised that John Lenahan, Manager, Transportation Planning, YVR and Mr. Hansel Wang, Manager, Road & Infrastructure Planning, TransLink, were available to respond to questions.

A brief discussion ensued, with information being provided by Mr. Lenahan that while YVR felt that the proposed traffic management initiatives were a good idea, YVR did not believe that these initiatives would address all of the problems occurring in the transit corridor.  He stated that action was required on the Vancouver side of the Arthur Laing Bridge, and he asked that the City work with YVR to approach the City of Vancouver on this matter.

Reference was made to the implementation of a Canada Line route to the airport, and questions were asked as to whether the new line would have an effect on bus ridership and if money was being spent on an initiative which could be obsolete in the future.  Discussion ensued among Committee members and staff on the use of buses, with comments being made that while it was possible that bus traffic could be removed from Russ Baker Way, it was felt that there was the possibility that a limited number of buses would be used to provide service to West Richmond and UBC.

Discussion continued briefly, with a comment being made that the extension of the HOV lane might encourage motor vehicle drivers to take the bus.  Potential short and long term solutions were also addressed, with a comment being made that traffic would always be an issue.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED.

***********************************

INFORMATION / AWARENESS (2 ITEMS)

ENGINEERING & PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

8.

RICHMOND FAMILY PLACE FACILITY UPGRADES

(Report:  Jan. 19/07, File No.:  06-2050-20-FP/Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2055315)

Please see Page 7 of these minutes for action taken on this matter.

BUSINESS & FINANCIAL SERVICES

9.

INVENTORY OF SPACE AVAILABLE FOR USE BY COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS

(Report:  Jan. 26/07, File No.:  06-2280-01/Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2071911)

It was moved and seconded

That the report (dated January 26^th, 2007, from the Manager, Real Estate Services), regarding an Inventory of Space Available for Use by Community Organizations, be received for information.

CARRIED

10.

MANAGER’S REPORT

The Director, Engineering, Robert Gonzalez, advised that notice had just been received that the water alteration event scheduled for Saturday, February 24^th, 2007, had been postponed tentatively to March 10, 2007.  In response to questions, he advised that the local press would be advised.

Cllr. Barnes referred to contract work being undertaken in the area of Buswell Street and Cook Road, and advised that she had been receiving complaints from business owners and residents about the inappropriate use of equipment by the contractor.  Mr. Gonzalez indicated that he would pursue the matter to ensure that the contractor was complying with all City bylaws.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:38 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Public Works & Transportation Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Wednesday, February 21^st, 2007.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Derek Dang
Chair

Fran J. Ashton
Executive Assistant, City Clerk’s Office